{"id":1638,"date":"2017-12-28T11:04:55","date_gmt":"2017-12-28T11:04:55","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/digitalgreen.org\/designing-a-training-with-participatory-and-co-creative-process\/"},"modified":"2024-01-11T06:26:22","modified_gmt":"2024-01-11T06:26:22","slug":"designing-a-training-with-participatory-and-co-creative-process","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/digitalgreen.org\/designing-a-training-with-participatory-and-co-creative-process\/","title":{"rendered":"Designing a Training with Participatory and Co-Creative Process"},"content":{"rendered":"

In my use of human-centered design (HCD) at Digital Green, I found that the inspiration and ideation phase in HCD as being completely intertwined. They can’t really be separated into two neatly divided phases. While we were trying to find a solution to the question \u2018How\u00a0can we enable field level workers to operate equipment confidently?\u2019 – the processes we followed seemed to make no sense initially. In my\u00a0previous blog, I had mentioned that it was the \u2018messiness\u2019 of the process that I really started enjoying, once I stopped being so\u00a0hung up about \u2018being systematic\u2019. In that,\u00a0what I both enjoyed and learnt the most was the freedom to follow your intuition and develop your own versions of methods, activities and processes.<\/p>\n

While we used several of the conventional methods, such as interviews and secondary research, we also designed and conducted activities with users that we felt would get us closer to our design principles, and the solution. They could largely be bunched under 2 categories:<\/p>\n